Transfer Dealings

Clyde was £12m
Tadic was £11m ???
Martina £2m

But close enough

 

So chuck the £34m on for the training ground And we're hardly stock piling cash

 

Are you glad you started this.

 

I'm not suggesting. that they are stock piling cash, but I was just interested to know how the money was being redistributed. There has been TV money and competition bonuses as well and I don't think all the other clubs solely finance their players from sales accrued. Clubs like Stoke for example haven't pulled that much from sales, but have still splashed out quite a bit of money.
I know that the transfer dealings are not finished yet and the new manager will want to put his own stamp on the squad but I will be disappointed to see too many more departures this Summer.

 

I did say approximately....

 

]Have made a couple of amends, also, Mane needs to be both 'out' and in' and Lallana in twice...

£69m net spend.
Maybe £10m on agents
Maybe £10m additional spent on wages over those two years.

Finish higher than the mugs who paid you all that money...

Not a bad day at the office if you ask me.[/QUOTE]

In fact it is probably better than this as I think we are confusing cash "profits" rather than declared profit and losses. Most of the players that we have sold did not cost very much in the first place or their original costs have been written off. I.e. Lambert, Schneiderlin, Shaw etc. On the other hand the player purchases we have made still have value in our books. E.g. Shane Long costing say £12m in 2014 will have had £6m written off since he joined us with a further amount of £6m to go. I am obviously ignoring players wages which are expensed elsewhere in the accounts. I could work it all out but I really can't be bothered.

 

Depends on what we do this summer. If our spending habits remain about what they have been in the past two seasons, we will indeed either have a very large stockpile of cash, or most of the debt paid back to Liebherr. Most of our debt came from the training ground...looking at solely the operation of the team, we've been fairly close to break-even since returning to the Prem.

 

we lost £27m on Gaston and Osvaldo and a net loss on Wanyama of £1m

Those three Cortese transfers and the training ground were the back foot in finance that this board has had to tackle.

I'd say we're back on an even keel now and that's reflected in the improved contracts.
We shall see how much we spend on incomings this window

 

I think we can safely take Vic out of that equation for two reasons. A £1m difference on buy and sale value of a player is peanuts.

He was a successful contributor for three seasons, unlike the other two. We got value
for our money and then mostly got it back.

I agree about the rest although we may have had a payment from Hull for loaning Gastin.

 

Yes because that list includes a 23m profit on Mane and no purchases this summer, so we need to wait for those and any more leavers.

That last line underlines our need to box clever in the market if, despite all those big money sales, the operation of the team is only close to break even. Without them we'd be making big losses it would seem.

 

Of course. However, we assuredly would not have bought certain players if not to replace the ones we sold.

Put another way: in four Premier League seasons (not including the sales thus far this summer), our player purchases have exceeded our sales by about 33m (by Transfermarkt), and yet setting aside capital expenditures and including money owed but not received on transfers, we're awfully close to par. We have also witnessed two massive jumps in the PL TV money, occurring in our 2nd and now 5th seasons. Take those two things together, and we can get a pretty good sense of what we can spend going forward without incurring any real financial difficulties, and conversely, we can infer that another season of effectively recirculating the money received in outbound transfers with no additional sum committed will result in a windfall.

 

I hadn't actually realised that player purchases and exceed sales. You'd think we didn't spend at all the way some people moan.

 

That's the Cortese era spending. Past two years, sales have exceeded purchases by about 25m.

 

I was looking at this purely from a financial perspective and not on vfm.

The financial position of the club on transfers looks a lot healthier if you ignore the two seasons under Cortese, which the op originally did.

So we spent £35m on Lovren, Vic & Osvaldo in 2013 and £12m on Gaston in 2012.

So that's a £47m outlay. Take this off of the transfer incomes we've made in the last three seasons and it gives a different perspective.

 

Can I just say,I know "the echo" get an awful lot wrong but they have produced a piece of work that I've asked myself a lot over the recent years.
Don't shoot me have a read because I thought it has been very well put,it asks questions that a lot of fans would like to know.
Sorry I don't know how to link it to here but it's on today's echo.
As I've said don't shoot me,read it and come back with some thoughts.
Cheers

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/sa..._so_hard_to_keep_their_crown_jewels_/?ref=mac

 

Thank you Fran

 

And repaying Kats bail out.

 

In answer to the Echo's question why we can't keep our crown jewels....we could, but this is our game plan. We can't afford the massive prices that other teams pay for players, so we prefer to buy them promising but cheap(ish), then pimp them up and sell them on to clubs who will pay high prices. From the players and agents POV, coming to Saints makes a lot of sense...we can provide a career path and won't unreasonably stand in their way. However, Saints don't want to do this and go down the tubes....we want to progress because after all we are a football club and it is also a by-product of being good at player development. It is a balancing act and so far we are doing rather well at it.